Reflection
The goal of this project was to become acquainted with the moral philosophies that influence peoples' decisions on whether something is morally right or wrong, just or unjust. We studied Deontology, Libertarianism, Utilitarianism, and John Rawls' Justice as Fairness, along with their respective "founding fathers". Deontology values human life above all else, and believes that nothing that is done can be defined as "good" or "just" unless it's done for the right reasons. Libertarianism puts the rights of the individual above all else, believing that if individual rights are protected, by default it will benefit the group as a whole. Utilitarianism believes quite the opposite- to be just, the solution to a problem must benefit the most amount of people possible, regardless of the individual cost. The "Justice as Fairness" philosophy is based on the "Veil of Ignorance" theory, where the idea is proposed that if one was raised without awareness of social class, financial status, race, or gender, any decision that person would make would be just because they would be bias-free. Over the course of this unit we've read and analyzed works like The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail and Civil Disobedience, to learn about civil disobedience. We also were presented with different moral dilemmas and were asked to prepare a solution to each problem using a different moral philosophy to justify our answer. Also, we were introduced to the fundamentals of rhetoric, how to analyze it, and how to incorporate it into our writing. The goal of this project was to choose a relevant, modern-day topic and write an op-ed based on the balance of liberty, security, and equality and justice, instead of our own opinion. We then had to create a visual representation of the approach we took, and incorporate the principles of rhetoric- ethos, pathos, and logos.
I learned a lot over the course of this project. I think one of the biggest revelations that came from doing this project and its subsequent exhibition was how heavily someone's personal bias can skew their definitions of morality and justice. For example, the US government has allowed many violations of American citizens' rights after the World Trade Center attacks, including aggressively monitoring American electronic communications and increasing police aggressiveness like the "Stop and Frisk" protocol and hyper-militarization of police forces. It was interesting to see how other people were able to apply these principles to justify the answers to the moral dilemmas they faced. Learning how to effectively use rhetoric to convey my thoughts really helped me when it came to the exhibition, because when my justifications were questioned by the people I talked to, I was able to counter their opinions and answer questions logically and knowledgeably.
Overall, I think my project was strongest in the rhetorical content. I think that the way I applied ethos, pathos, and logos, effectively conveyed my perspective on the moral dilemma at hand and provided good evidence to convince people to think the way I do. My project was probably weakest in the oral and philosophy content portion. I feel like I should've dedicated more of my written piece to explaining the moral philosophies and connecting them to my topic. For example, when explaining how the PRISM program violated personal rights, I could've directly connected it to why Libertarianism and Utilitarianism don't work together.
If I had another week to work on my project, I would have further refined my written piece for this project. In retrospect, there were a few topics mentioned in my paper that I should've spent more time researching, but I know that adding much more to my paper would've put me over the word limit. I think that if I had more time to refine and review it, I could have made the paper better. I also believe that if I had more time to refine my visual piece, I could've been able to incorporate more of the aspects of rhetoric to make it more provocative. I also would've tried to get my hands on better designing software so I could have had an easier time making my poster look how I wanted it to.
The goal of this project was to become acquainted with the moral philosophies that influence peoples' decisions on whether something is morally right or wrong, just or unjust. We studied Deontology, Libertarianism, Utilitarianism, and John Rawls' Justice as Fairness, along with their respective "founding fathers". Deontology values human life above all else, and believes that nothing that is done can be defined as "good" or "just" unless it's done for the right reasons. Libertarianism puts the rights of the individual above all else, believing that if individual rights are protected, by default it will benefit the group as a whole. Utilitarianism believes quite the opposite- to be just, the solution to a problem must benefit the most amount of people possible, regardless of the individual cost. The "Justice as Fairness" philosophy is based on the "Veil of Ignorance" theory, where the idea is proposed that if one was raised without awareness of social class, financial status, race, or gender, any decision that person would make would be just because they would be bias-free. Over the course of this unit we've read and analyzed works like The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail and Civil Disobedience, to learn about civil disobedience. We also were presented with different moral dilemmas and were asked to prepare a solution to each problem using a different moral philosophy to justify our answer. Also, we were introduced to the fundamentals of rhetoric, how to analyze it, and how to incorporate it into our writing. The goal of this project was to choose a relevant, modern-day topic and write an op-ed based on the balance of liberty, security, and equality and justice, instead of our own opinion. We then had to create a visual representation of the approach we took, and incorporate the principles of rhetoric- ethos, pathos, and logos.
I learned a lot over the course of this project. I think one of the biggest revelations that came from doing this project and its subsequent exhibition was how heavily someone's personal bias can skew their definitions of morality and justice. For example, the US government has allowed many violations of American citizens' rights after the World Trade Center attacks, including aggressively monitoring American electronic communications and increasing police aggressiveness like the "Stop and Frisk" protocol and hyper-militarization of police forces. It was interesting to see how other people were able to apply these principles to justify the answers to the moral dilemmas they faced. Learning how to effectively use rhetoric to convey my thoughts really helped me when it came to the exhibition, because when my justifications were questioned by the people I talked to, I was able to counter their opinions and answer questions logically and knowledgeably.
Overall, I think my project was strongest in the rhetorical content. I think that the way I applied ethos, pathos, and logos, effectively conveyed my perspective on the moral dilemma at hand and provided good evidence to convince people to think the way I do. My project was probably weakest in the oral and philosophy content portion. I feel like I should've dedicated more of my written piece to explaining the moral philosophies and connecting them to my topic. For example, when explaining how the PRISM program violated personal rights, I could've directly connected it to why Libertarianism and Utilitarianism don't work together.
If I had another week to work on my project, I would have further refined my written piece for this project. In retrospect, there were a few topics mentioned in my paper that I should've spent more time researching, but I know that adding much more to my paper would've put me over the word limit. I think that if I had more time to refine and review it, I could have made the paper better. I also believe that if I had more time to refine my visual piece, I could've been able to incorporate more of the aspects of rhetoric to make it more provocative. I also would've tried to get my hands on better designing software so I could have had an easier time making my poster look how I wanted it to.